Federal law is a part of the heterogeneous collection of the laws specified by United States labor laws. Federal labor law helps to organize and set the standards of a worker’s right in a private sector. At the same instance, it even overrides most of the state laws and the local laws that try to regulate this area of action. For those working in the federal government limited rights are provided by the federal law. A federal labor law poster is a body issuing all these standards provisioned by the federal law. A labor law poster includes all the information that one needs to have regarding the standards issued by the law. These set provisions vary from the region to the region. For e.g. in Texas, the laws issued would depend on the state of the working conditions and atmosphere. Hence, the poster issued will be the Texas labor law poster.
A federal labor law poster would include some necessary terms such as Employee Polygraph notice, IRS Withholding Notice, INS Description that is issued by Department of Justice, federal minimum wage of a worker, Federal OSHA “it’s the law” and Family and Medical Leave act, which is applicable only on an employer who has 50 or more employees working for him. These instructions prevent any sort of differentiation or discrimination among the workers at any level. Federal law take care of the needs and requirement of a worker such as pensions and other benefits. The minimum wages and overtime rates are fixed by the federal law to prevent the workers from suffering any problem. The Ohio labor law poster will include the same provisions formatted for the benefits of the workers over there.
A federal labor law poster is regulated form time to time and reflects the new changes made in the same. For e.g. the labor law poster has been changed recently according the new developments made and can now be obtained in compliance for the year 2010. These days such posters are shipping at a large scale to reflect the new regulations made in the direction of EEOC or Equal Employment Opportunity. An Ohio labor law poster will reflect the new regulations made for the same year according to the needs of the workers in that region.
Get your complied federal and state labor law posters all the time.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
An Overview of the Federal and State Labor Law Posters of New York
The legislation of the state of the New York in the United States of America mandates all the small and big business organizations running over there to safely post the federal and state labor law posters or in simple words, a New York labor law posture at their offices or somewhere in the office where the employees or the staff member make frequent visits such as the lobby, lunching room, etc. This is important so as to make the employees of the staff members of a particular business unit in the state of New York
The federal and state labor law posters actually exhibit the laws and the legislations that have been imposed by different federal and state law agencies working in a particular state of New York of United States of America, so that the employees as well as the employers are in line with them. The legislations that need to be posted by business units in a New York labor law poster, in New York are minimum wage information, transfer benefits, time permitted to vote, unemployment, New York Correction Law Article 23-A, workers' compensation & disability Benefits (All In One), (MEMO) discrimination laws governing the employment of minors (Child Labor) tip appropriation, deduction from wages and no smoking.
Almost all of the federal and state labor law posters that come in the state of the New York are of the commercial category and every New York
Monday, January 18, 2010
DOL issues final safe harbor rule on employee contributions to small pension and welfare plans
On Jan 13, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) announced the publication of a final rule, which provides a safe harbor deadline for depositing employee contributions in small pension or welfare benefit plans with fewer than 100 participants. This deadline is the seventh business day following receipt or withholding by employers.
At present, employers of all sizes must transmit employee contributions to pension plans as soon as they can reasonably be segregated from the general assets of the employer, while no later than the 15th business day of the month following the month in which contributions are received or withheld by the employer. The latest date for forwarding participant contributions to health plans is 90 days from the date on which such amounts are received or withheld by the employer.
The final labor law rule amends the participant contribution rules to create a safe harbor period. Under this, if the participant contribution amounts are deposited with the plan within seven business days of receipt or withholding, they will be treated as complying with the law.
The final rule is consistent with the proposed rule. The department did not expand the safe harbor to cover plans with 100 or more participants due to a lack of information and data sufficient to evaluate current practices of such employers and assess the costs, benefits and risks to participants associated with extending the safe harbor to large plans.
Phyllis C. Borzi, assistant secretary of labor for the department's Employee Benefits Security Administration said "This rule will give employers greater clarity in remitting participant contributions to small pension and welfare plans in a timely manner…We estimate participant accounts could grow by $19 to $44 million as a result of these rules."
At present, employers of all sizes must transmit employee contributions to pension plans as soon as they can reasonably be segregated from the general assets of the employer, while no later than the 15th business day of the month following the month in which contributions are received or withheld by the employer. The latest date for forwarding participant contributions to health plans is 90 days from the date on which such amounts are received or withheld by the employer.
The final labor law rule amends the participant contribution rules to create a safe harbor period. Under this, if the participant contribution amounts are deposited with the plan within seven business days of receipt or withholding, they will be treated as complying with the law.
The final rule is consistent with the proposed rule. The department did not expand the safe harbor to cover plans with 100 or more participants due to a lack of information and data sufficient to evaluate current practices of such employers and assess the costs, benefits and risks to participants associated with extending the safe harbor to large plans.
Phyllis C. Borzi, assistant secretary of labor for the department's Employee Benefits Security Administration said "This rule will give employers greater clarity in remitting participant contributions to small pension and welfare plans in a timely manner…We estimate participant accounts could grow by $19 to $44 million as a result of these rules."
Thursday, January 14, 2010
California May Release New Exempt Employee Regulations
Recently, the California Division of Labor Law Standards Enforcement (DLSE) presents an opinion to permit employers to deduct vacation and sick leave for an exempt employee’s absence of less than 4 hours. Then the deduction is included in the employers’ written policies.
Besides, the California employer to deduct a combination of paid sick leave and vacation for a partial-day absence. Currently, this opinion has no law force yet, so employers should wait for the California courts’ rule on the change.
This opinion letter has a great difference than that of before. Just as in other states, California pays an exempt employee who works part of the day for the entire day payment. However, the issue was how that payment would be tabulated.
The state regards that an exempt employee who worked a partial day could not have sick or vacation time of less than 4 hours deducted from the employee’s balance. That was in opposition to federal law as interpreted by courts in most of the states. California should update the California labor law poster and other labor law posters if the regulation has law force.
Besides, the California employer to deduct a combination of paid sick leave and vacation for a partial-day absence. Currently, this opinion has no law force yet, so employers should wait for the California courts’ rule on the change.
This opinion letter has a great difference than that of before. Just as in other states, California pays an exempt employee who works part of the day for the entire day payment. However, the issue was how that payment would be tabulated.
The state regards that an exempt employee who worked a partial day could not have sick or vacation time of less than 4 hours deducted from the employee’s balance. That was in opposition to federal law as interpreted by courts in most of the states. California should update the California labor law poster and other labor law posters if the regulation has law force.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
US DOL announces grant to assist Texas layoffs affected by construction and manufacturing industry
On Jan 5, the U.S. Department of Labor announced a $2,201,214 grant to assist about 500 workers affected by layoffs at multiple companies in the construction and manufacturing industries in central and southeastern Texas.
The grant was awarded to the Texas Workforce Commission, and will be operated by the Central Texas Workforce Board. Of the $2,201,214 announced, $1,021,902 will be released initially. Additional funding up to the amount approved will be made available as the state demonstrates a continued need for assistance. Layoffs at the companies covered took place between September 2008 and April 2009. Those from Alcoa Inc. and Zachry Holdings Inc., who are also certified as eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), will be provided with access to "wrap-around" and supportive services, such as dependent care and transportation assistance, which are not available through the TAA program. Some other dislocated workers, from Becon Construction Co. Inc. and Texas Hydraulics Inc., who are not TAA-eligible, will be provided with access to the full array of dislocated worker services available.
"Texas construction and manufacturing workers have contributed immensely to our nation, and they deserve our support," said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "This grant will help ensure that the affected workers receive the employment and retraining services necessary for securing jobs in new and emerging local industries." The grant will be funded by resources made available for National Emergency Grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Keep your updatedlabor law posters, for Texas employers, especially Texas labor law poster displayed!
The grant was awarded to the Texas Workforce Commission, and will be operated by the Central Texas Workforce Board. Of the $2,201,214 announced, $1,021,902 will be released initially. Additional funding up to the amount approved will be made available as the state demonstrates a continued need for assistance. Layoffs at the companies covered took place between September 2008 and April 2009. Those from Alcoa Inc. and Zachry Holdings Inc., who are also certified as eligible for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA), will be provided with access to "wrap-around" and supportive services, such as dependent care and transportation assistance, which are not available through the TAA program. Some other dislocated workers, from Becon Construction Co. Inc. and Texas Hydraulics Inc., who are not TAA-eligible, will be provided with access to the full array of dislocated worker services available.
"Texas construction and manufacturing workers have contributed immensely to our nation, and they deserve our support," said Secretary of Labor Hilda L. Solis. "This grant will help ensure that the affected workers receive the employment and retraining services necessary for securing jobs in new and emerging local industries." The grant will be funded by resources made available for National Emergency Grants under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Keep your updatedlabor law posters, for Texas employers, especially Texas labor law poster displayed!
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Vermont Needs Lunch Law
Now there are nineteen states in the United States has passed legislation requiring employers to offer lunch breaks to their employees. However, Vermont has no such law. There is only little protection for employees when they come to meal breaks in terms of the federal law. Employers in the state theoretically would be entirely within the law to work their employees 8, 10, or even 16 or more hours a day without a meal break of any kind. That makes Vermont workers surprise.
The only federal protection comes in the form of laws intended to address public safety issues rather than workers’ rights. In the U.S. Department of Transportation, it requires that meal breaks should be taken in certain occupations, such as interstate truck drivers and airline pilots.
On the other hand, Vermont employers may require workers to take lunch breaks. So a company policy is needed to require workers to clock out for unpaid lunch breaks. The Human Resources profession recommends against working employees without a meal break. Giving workers a 30 minutes unpaid break per shift is considered by general Human Resource field. It’s found that despite what common sense might say, workers granted these breaks are actually more productive.
There are 19 states that mandate meal breaks include the following: Nevada, Washington, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Nebraska, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Connecticut, Colorado, West Virginia, and Illinois. Vermont is not in the list. If the law is included in the labor law, the labor law poster and other employment law posters are required to post in the workplace.
The only federal protection comes in the form of laws intended to address public safety issues rather than workers’ rights. In the U.S. Department of Transportation, it requires that meal breaks should be taken in certain occupations, such as interstate truck drivers and airline pilots.
On the other hand, Vermont employers may require workers to take lunch breaks. So a company policy is needed to require workers to clock out for unpaid lunch breaks. The Human Resources profession recommends against working employees without a meal break. Giving workers a 30 minutes unpaid break per shift is considered by general Human Resource field. It’s found that despite what common sense might say, workers granted these breaks are actually more productive.
There are 19 states that mandate meal breaks include the following: Nevada, Washington, New Hampshire, Tennessee, Nebraska, Minnesota, Massachusetts, Kentucky, Connecticut, Colorado, West Virginia, and Illinois. Vermont is not in the list. If the law is included in the labor law, the labor law poster and other employment law posters are required to post in the workplace.
Monday, January 11, 2010
What behind the Labor law
If the National Assembly’s environment and labor committee has not passed its revision for labor regulations, a big disaster could have happened in labor-management relations last year.
With the revision companies was granted to delay the introduction of multiple unions in a single workplace for one year and six months and postpone implementing a wage ban for full-time labor union representative for six months.
Although the time for introducing multiple unions can come a little earlier than the original plan, it require multiple unions in a company to form a single negotiation channel for labor talks with the firm.
However the revised labor law did not go so smoothly, as it was distorted when it went though some politicians. In order to meet the interests of some politicians, the revised law was full of additional provisions and conditions. This means that the true purpose of the revision law was tarnished by politically motivated goals. An added provision stating that a company and a labor union can delay implementing the wage ban for unionists for up to two years is a clear example.
The additional provisions were some that was not discussed in labor, business and government meetings. To minimize possible confusion over the provision, the Labor Ministry belatedly stepped in and said that if a company and labor union attempt to revise a collective agreement to enable full-time union members to receive wages, any deal made after Jan. 1 won’t be binding. No matter what positions the ministry hold in the revised law, it is possible that some legal dispute may happen in terms of interrupting the law.
Apart from mentioned above, another controversial thing is about timed-off system.
Grand Nationals extended the definition of the time-off system to include “general union management operations” from the original “certain union activities,” but again changed the definition to “union management operations to lead healthy labor-management ties.” The way that obtuse language was used in the law added complexity to it.
As the revised labor law was passed by the National Assembly, it’s now time for crafting the details for ordinances to implement the law. To minimize confusion and the side effects of the new labor law, it’s important for people involved in these issues to stick to their principles. We must keep in mind that both labor and management should be focused on carrying out the revised law, as that will eventually lead to an amicable settlement on this issue.
Actions need to be taken for employers to keep their labor law poster updated.
With the revision companies was granted to delay the introduction of multiple unions in a single workplace for one year and six months and postpone implementing a wage ban for full-time labor union representative for six months.
Although the time for introducing multiple unions can come a little earlier than the original plan, it require multiple unions in a company to form a single negotiation channel for labor talks with the firm.
However the revised labor law did not go so smoothly, as it was distorted when it went though some politicians. In order to meet the interests of some politicians, the revised law was full of additional provisions and conditions. This means that the true purpose of the revision law was tarnished by politically motivated goals. An added provision stating that a company and a labor union can delay implementing the wage ban for unionists for up to two years is a clear example.
The additional provisions were some that was not discussed in labor, business and government meetings. To minimize possible confusion over the provision, the Labor Ministry belatedly stepped in and said that if a company and labor union attempt to revise a collective agreement to enable full-time union members to receive wages, any deal made after Jan. 1 won’t be binding. No matter what positions the ministry hold in the revised law, it is possible that some legal dispute may happen in terms of interrupting the law.
Apart from mentioned above, another controversial thing is about timed-off system.
Grand Nationals extended the definition of the time-off system to include “general union management operations” from the original “certain union activities,” but again changed the definition to “union management operations to lead healthy labor-management ties.” The way that obtuse language was used in the law added complexity to it.
As the revised labor law was passed by the National Assembly, it’s now time for crafting the details for ordinances to implement the law. To minimize confusion and the side effects of the new labor law, it’s important for people involved in these issues to stick to their principles. We must keep in mind that both labor and management should be focused on carrying out the revised law, as that will eventually lead to an amicable settlement on this issue.
Actions need to be taken for employers to keep their labor law poster updated.
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
2010 United States Minimum Wage
In January 2009, many states increased their minimum wage. But in 2010, only a few states change their minimum wage and most of the states are keeping steady.
The state of Kansas increased its minimum wage from $2.65 per hour to 7.25 per hour on January 1, 2010. This is the first time in recent twenty years that increased the minimum wage. Now, Kansas is not the state with the lowest minimum wage. There are five states have no minimum wage whatsoever, like Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Louisiana and South Carolina.
Different from other states, some state decreased its minimum wage. Colorado decreased its minimum wage by 4 cents from $7.28 per hour to $7.24 per hour. The employees who are covered by the federal minimum wage enjoy $7.25 per hour. Those states increase the minimum wage in terms of the cost of living. The following state don’t increase the minimum wage this year, they are Ohio, Washington, Oregon, Vermont, Nevada, Montana, Missouri and Arizona.
Totally speaking, except Georgia, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Arkansas have a minimum wage lower than the federal minimum wage, 14 states have minimum wages higher than the federal rate of $7.25 per hour, while 26 states have a minimum wage of $7.25.
The state of Kansas increased its minimum wage from $2.65 per hour to 7.25 per hour on January 1, 2010. This is the first time in recent twenty years that increased the minimum wage. Now, Kansas is not the state with the lowest minimum wage. There are five states have no minimum wage whatsoever, like Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Louisiana and South Carolina.
Different from other states, some state decreased its minimum wage. Colorado decreased its minimum wage by 4 cents from $7.28 per hour to $7.24 per hour. The employees who are covered by the federal minimum wage enjoy $7.25 per hour. Those states increase the minimum wage in terms of the cost of living. The following state don’t increase the minimum wage this year, they are Ohio, Washington, Oregon, Vermont, Nevada, Montana, Missouri and Arizona.
Totally speaking, except Georgia, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Arkansas have a minimum wage lower than the federal minimum wage, 14 states have minimum wages higher than the federal rate of $7.25 per hour, while 26 states have a minimum wage of $7.25.
Monday, January 04, 2010
Vermont minimum wage to stay at $8.06 in 2010
The Vermont minimum wage in 2010 will stay at $8.06 per hour, according to the Vermont Department of Labor. This is good news for employers in a state where the minimum wage normally increases every year.
For tipped employees who regularly earn at least $120 per month in tips for direct and personal service, the basic wage will also remain stable at $3.91 per hour. However, their total earnings from wages and tips during a pay period must equal or exceed $8.06 per hour. If the combined amount of the basic wage and tips does not meet that requirement, the employer must pay the difference in direct wages.
Under state law, the Vermont minimum wage increases each year based on the Consumer Price Index or CPI, and the increase each year is limited to a maximum of 5%. According to a press release issued by the Vermont Department of Labor, the cost of living fell by 1.5% between September 1, 2008 and August 31, 2009. Vermont law does not allow the minimum wage to decline, so it will remain the same as for 2009, at $8.06 per hour.
“A steady minimum wage reflects our economic times, “according to Labor Commissioner Patricia Moulton Powden. “The cost of living has fallen and the ability of employers to increase pay is limited by the recession.”
Keep you updated labor law posters displayed!
For tipped employees who regularly earn at least $120 per month in tips for direct and personal service, the basic wage will also remain stable at $3.91 per hour. However, their total earnings from wages and tips during a pay period must equal or exceed $8.06 per hour. If the combined amount of the basic wage and tips does not meet that requirement, the employer must pay the difference in direct wages.
Under state law, the Vermont minimum wage increases each year based on the Consumer Price Index or CPI, and the increase each year is limited to a maximum of 5%. According to a press release issued by the Vermont Department of Labor, the cost of living fell by 1.5% between September 1, 2008 and August 31, 2009. Vermont law does not allow the minimum wage to decline, so it will remain the same as for 2009, at $8.06 per hour.
“A steady minimum wage reflects our economic times, “according to Labor Commissioner Patricia Moulton Powden. “The cost of living has fallen and the ability of employers to increase pay is limited by the recession.”
Keep you updated labor law posters displayed!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)